The
stage has been set for a courtroom clash pitting the
well-known Holocaust denier David Irving against
Emory University's Deborah Lipstadt. The conflict,
which centers around libel charges Irving brought against
Lipstadt for her 1993 book,
"Denying The
Holocaust: The Growing Assault On Truth And
Memory," is set to go to
trial
in London next
January.

Irving, a self-described "mild
fascist," is author of more than 30 books. He questions,
among other things, the use of gas chambers at Auschwitz.
He is suing Lipstadt for defaming his reputation as a
historian.

In her book, Lipstadt labels Irving "one of the most
dangerous spokespersons for Holocaust denial... who is most
facile at taking accurate information and shaping it to
confirm his conclusions."

Burden of
proof

Irving's chances for success are enhanced in the United
Kingdom, where the burden of proof required in libel suits
places the defendant at a disadvantage. Lipstadt's
co-defendant is her publishing house, Penguin Books,
Ltd.

In the United States, the plaintiff must prove that
alleged libelous statements were made with malice and prior
knowledge that the statements were false, while English law
asks the defendant to demonstrate the veracity of a
statement, according to William Lee, a journalism
professor at the University of Georgia.

"The bottom line is, it's much easier to win a defamation
action in England than it is in the United States," said
Lee. "That's probably why this suit was brought in England
rather than the United States."

Lipstadt
wrote the book because of her concern that Holocaust deniers
are finding mainstream forums for their ideas. She
buttresses her point -- "the denial of the Holocaust has no
more credibility than the assertion that the earth is flat"
-- by shedding light on the questionable modus operandi of
deniers and then submitting evidence to refute their
claims.

Lipstadt, who declined to discuss the upcoming trial on
the advice of her attorneys, is an internationally
recognized Holocaust scholar who was recently named chair of
the Institute for Jewish Studies at Emory University. She
said Holocaust deniers are typically extremists.

"It's a way of getting at Jews and the Jewish community,"
she said. "My fear is that it will be accepted as a valid
historical perspective, which it's clearly not."

For his part, Irving said he is the object of hatred by
Jewish and other organizations bent on destroying
his legitimacy as a historian. He prefers the term
"revisionist" to describe his views on the Holocaust. He may
have chosen to bring a lawsuit against Lipstadt in England
because her book was published there.

"Lipstadt may find it unfortunate that she is the one to
be taken out of the line and shot," he said via e-mail from
Key West, Fla. "The fact is that Lipstadt was silly enough
to print her libels within the jurisdiction of the British
courts. Others have been more circumspect."

The defense

Lipstadt's defense will likely be "justification," an
English legalism meaning the published material is truthful.
Unlike in American courts, Irving can not sue for a
specified amount in damages. If he wins the case, English
law dictates that the court assesses an amount.

Lipstadt's lawyer, Anthony Julius, of London's
Mishcon de Reya law firm, declined to comment for this
article. Julius is well-known as the divorce lawyer for the
late Princess Diana; he has also written a book about
anti-Semitism in the works of poet T.S. Eliot.

Daniel Levitas, an Atlanta-based writer and
researcher who specializes in issues of equality and hate
groups, submitted a 42-page sworn affidavit stating that he
witnessed Irving consorting with known neo-Nazis, racist
skinheads and members of the Ku Klux Klan during an
appearance in Smyrna, Ga. in 1992. Levitas said the lawsuit
was an attempt to elevate Irving's profile in the neo-Nazi
community.

"David Irving has filed this lawsuit in an attempt to
present himself as the victim of a smear campaign and
therefore someone who is in dire need of financial support,"
Levitas said. "David Irving himself is an unrepentant bigot
who consorts so frequently with neo-Nazis as to be
indistinguishable from them."

Peter Novick, a history
professor at the University of Chicago and the author of
"The Holocaust In American
Life," is not worried that an Irving victory could
legitimize the arguments of Holocaust deniers.

"The big problem for these wackos is being ignored," he
said. "Even if [Irving] won, it would be seen for
what it is, a purely, technical, legal thing of no substance
or meaning whatsoever. These guys are so discredited
already, it wouldn't matter."